Ah, I thought it was a case of "moral outrage". however, TFA tells us that the author, a lone wolf of entertainment and journalistic integrity, is having his series "Something I Have Never Heard Of and Will Never Watch or Read", blatantly stolen and plagiarized by the carrion feeding corporate vulture-bullies that are the combined two-headed dick dragon of Mythbusters and The Discovery Channel. He goes on to inform us, the fan club rooting for this underdog in this treacherous fight, that this is the third time his Ninja Lawyers have thrown their poison tipped cease and desist shurikens at this seemingly immortal animal that, while he has defeated three times before in a triumphant battle only eclipsed by such epics as "The Time I Sued the Paperboy for Damaging my Front Door", and "No, I Can and Will Trim Those Tree Branches", keeps coming back for more.

Will the two headed phallus monster return for another beating?! Will the Author finally get the recognition he deserves?!

Tune in at I Have No Idea on Sunday Through Monday for your next episode of "Something I Have Never Heard Of and Will Never Watch or Read" to find out.

I was wondering what was going on until I gave up caring whoever this guy is because he just sounds like a whining-Hipster-type who came up with some web series and now wants to be recognized for a "know-nothing-about-dont-give-a-shiat-show" that apparently only a few folks in Australia have seen.

And now he prevents me seeing Kari Byron in a Mythbusters show about farking?! Seriously, fark this guy!

Yeah, I really doubt that your little crusade about a show "stealing" incredibly common phrases and ideas from your website that I've never heard of had more to do with the episode being pulled than Discovery getting skittish about potential controversy.

Because as I have previously alleged, Discovery and Mythbusters misappropriated content from my series, This vs That. And now they were misappropriating even more ideas of mine along with a title for an entirely different show... that I had also pitched to them, called: "The Laws of Attraction."

Google search for "The Laws of Attraction": About 1.96 million hits, including a 2004 movie.

But yeah, I'm so sure they stole the title from you, Mr WhineyAuthor.

Also, you can't copyright or trademark or whatever a book/movie/song/whatever title, so -- in the end -- be prepared to lose your argument.

Myths are myths because a significant percentage of the population believes them. I don't see how you can "own" the idea of examining a common myth. That's like "owning" the concept of finding out whether turkey really causes drowsiness.

So, a web-only "TV" show, with a singular copyright year of 2014, that essentially is a Mythbusters Mr Wizard ripoff, sans kids, is upset that they happened to cover the same topics that can be found on any fan site for the show in question??

I'm sure the creator of just about every sitcom is just inundated with C&D letters from the first sitcom ever created, right?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia. Its pretty damn sleazy. So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada. Who cares? Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari. That part sucks. But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?

His ideas were vague generalities involving common "myths". Not the sort of thing that is protected.

"Investigating five clichés about the laws of attraction; a preference to blondes; pheromones; tips correlating with breast size; wealth."

Or, what you'd come up with from scanning every fark thread about sex and relationships ever.

desertgeek:To me, this guy's issue is more sour grapes than anything else. He's pissed that his show wasn't picked up by Discovery and that the show they did choose to buy is successful while he's stuck with a web show. He might be able to prove some of his arguments, but many of them are really grasping at straws.

The other point is that not only did he make his pitch after Mythbusters was already wildly successful, but his pitch was pure crap. According to the link posted earlier, he vacillated between priding himself on his independence yet practically begging for Discovery to give him money to improve the show to make it mainstream.

That ain't how life works bud. You need to prove that you have a product that is new, exciting, and viable. Pitching an idea that is already "done", and has no proven record of viability isn't going to work.

End result: go back to the drawing board rather than obstructing Discovery from airing more episodes that share coincidental similarities to your own.

I don't think he even has a good argument that his "ideas" were stolen. Even if written down, ideas are only ideas until a real product is made out of them. You can't fraud a patent or copyright if it isn't already in the system.

This is the fat IP trolling Douchenozzle who created the series, This vs That...and is accusing the Discovery Channel and Mythbusters of taking work, ideas and content that belong to me.

Let me begin by saying: In my defense, I've also lost at the Emmys 13 times, as well... and if you could see the back of my head in that photo of me in the t-shirt, you'd also see that I'm beginning to show signs of a bald spot. Also, my cholesterol is too high.

Would you guys be up for a Google Hangout? I'd love to answer all your questions LIVE.

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia. Its pretty damn sleazy. So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada. Who cares? Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari. That part sucks. But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?

All I'm really seeing here is that this guy had some amazingly original ideas like "Is it faster to drive or fly from San Francisco to LA?" and something to do with airplane boarding efficiency. The side-by-side comparisons are pretty ridiculous, since most of the things are like "They both used passengers with various types of luggage!" (he actually uses this one twice) and "They both put a bunch of cameras on the cars in the experiment!" as if those are unusual enough to indicate plagiarism.

And now he's appalled at the fact that Mythbusters used the same unoriginal title he did, "Law of Attraction," for... well, we don't actually know, since he's apparently chucked a lawsuit at them before it even aired because he's so sure they ripped him off. Sheesh.

From what I read he was in negotiations with Discovery for them to buy his series, they wanted to buy the rights to his series without bringing him on board to be a part of it. He said no so Discovery went ahead and just used his ideas. If you look beyond the linked article there is actually a lot of proof.

Also, does anyone here really want to support the network that brought us ghost hunting reality shows?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

I did see that, and, even the allegations are completely true, I hope the Mythbusters air the episode everywhere and never pay the guy a cent. I want this guy to be stolen from.

However, I doubt he has a legitimate claim. As far as I can tell, he's alleging they stole content based on the title of the episode. Unless he has knowledge he's not revealing (and I doubt that, because I doubt he'd pass up a way to make himself look even more like a douche) his only reasonable claim is that they stole the title.

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia. Its pretty damn sleazy. So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada. Who cares? Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari. That part sucks. But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?

No. They prefer their uninformed snark and fanboy fawning of some chick.

If you click through the links on that page providing more background information it looks pretty damning. Considering the guys history in the biz and the amount of corroborating information he's kept, he probably has a case. We'll see.

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia. Its pretty damn sleazy. So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada. Who cares? Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari. That part sucks. But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?

How about we go a few levels deeper? What is an idea? What constitutes an obvious idea? What protection under the law does an "idea" have?

faultytower:I was wondering what was going on until I gave up caring whoever this guy is because he just sounds like a whining-Hipster-type who came up with some web series and now wants to be recognized for a "know-nothing-about-dont-give-a-shiat-show" that apparently only a few folks in Australia have seen.

And now he prevents me seeing Kari Byron in a Mythbusters show about farking?! Seriously, fark this guy!

... Came here on my soapbox (OK, actually from my bunk) to say this. Thank you for saying this.